INTRODUCTION HOBBS FAMILY – MILLEWA, VIC LINKLATER FAMILY – GOL GOL, NSW

Why was BioAgtive appealing? Faced with high input costs and poor seasons Dilemma of whether it was viable to sow a crop using traditional inputs Ongoing viability and profitability under threat Risk management tool BioAgtive is ONE tool we use in our farming system

OBSERVATIONS Germination in 3 – 5 days Vigorous root growth Delayed development stages vs crops with traditional fertilizer application – grows in “steps” Horses-for-courses with regard to post emergent inputs ie nutrient Extensive soil audit to monitor available nutrition

Early root growth

Root development & hyphae

Observations cont. Comparative yields to date – two dry years, one average rainfall Predicting comparative yield this year – wetter year Trentham Cliffs – same soil type, management history etc Griffith farmer

Wheat, Trentham Cliffs NSW, 20 Oct 2010 Which plant has been force-fed? AB

Other Benefits Healthy soils Increase organic carbon  increased water holding capacity Carbon sequestration? - how much? Reduced fossil fuel based inputs – less N₂0 and other GHG emissions Reduced carbon footprint

Season 2010 – Trentham Cliffs, NSW

Implementing BioAgtive – Marc 1

Farmers using the method in Australia 4 in NSW 5 in VIC 2 in SA 6 in WA 2010 is the third season for one farmer, the second for three farmers and the first for thirteen

Marc 3

Trials Extensive trials in WA – will provide useful post harvest data despite dry season Our own farm trials continue Regular soil tests; annual soil audit In-crop leaf analysis Seeking opportunities for further research and collaboration with scientific community to gain a better understanding of carbon sequestration potential and nutritional benefits for plant and product

Thank you